Post history

History for bwtcf

Alternative Wellington Stadium

Back to topic

Current version

Posted January 20, 2015 22:28 · last edited January 20, 2015 22:29

Ryan54 wrote:

You said that

"the poor AND DECLINING crowds are a result of the round dual purpose atmosphere diluting cake tin stadium." I disagreed with that statement. Aren't I allowed to do that? Or do you not like discussions where someone disagrees with you? Makes it difficult to have a conversation then doesn't it? We would be damn stupid if we just built a new stadium and didn't look at the huge differences between the two cities or search for what other evidence there is available.
 

I conceded that stadium size and shape are important factors. I just don't think they are the only ones. In fact the very article you quoted mentions several other factors for Seattle's poor crowds! It sounds like you just took the points out of the article you wanted to. You have ignored pertinent facts like the roof on the Kingdome leaked and tiles collapsed before a game (not mentioned in the article). Nowhere in the Guardian article does it even say that a lack of crowd noise was why the Kingdome had to be replaced. 

The Mariners received higher crowds in their last couple of years at the Kingdome then they do at Safeco Field today. Admittedly this is because they did better in their last couple of seasons in the Kingdome. This is my point though on field performance is more important than atmosphere. Isn't it more logical to spend 500k on a marquee every season so we can have a winning then shell out 20 mill for a stadium and pay 500k upkeep every season?

I can post evidence to say I disagree with that like how the Westpac Stadium used to get fantastic crowds when Super Rugby was a more attractive competition for fans.

I can post an article about how some NRL teams have seen increased crowds moving away from boutique grounds to centralised stadiums. If you disagreed with that then wouldn't you be doing the same thing you accused me of?

You are absolutely allowed to disagree. It was not clear that you were disagreeing with that particular statement, or why, until now. Thanks for clarifying.

Please note I did day what you said I said, but you have interpreted that as me saying it is the ONLY reason, which I did NOT say. 

I agree with you that it is __A__ factor, but NOT the ONLY factor. I agree 100% that there are a range of factors. I never said there wasn't.

Previous versions

1 version
bwtcf edited January 20, 2015 22:29
Ryan54 wrote:

You said that

"the poor AND DECLINING crowds are a result of the round dual purpose atmosphere diluting cake tin stadium." I disagreed with that statement. Aren't I allowed to do that? Or do you not like discussions where someone disagrees with you? Makes it difficult to have a conversation then doesn't it? We would be damn stupid if we just built a new stadium and didn't look at the huge differences between the two cities or search for what other evidence there is available.
 

I conceded that stadium size and shape are important factors. I just don't think they are the only ones. In fact the very article you quoted mentions several other factors for Seattle's poor crowds! It sounds like you just took the points out of the article you wanted to. You have ignored pertinent facts like the roof on the Kingdome leaked and tiles collapsed before a game (not mentioned in the article). Nowhere in the Guardian article does it even say that a lack of crowd noise was why the Kingdome had to be replaced. 

The Mariners received higher crowds in their last couple of years at the Kingdome then they do at Safeco Field today. Admittedly this is because they did better in their last couple of seasons in the Kingdome. This is my point though on field performance is more important than atmosphere. Isn't it more logical to spend 500k on a marquee every season so we can have a winning then shell out 20 mill for a stadium and pay 500k upkeep every season?

I can post evidence to say I disagree with that like how the Westpac Stadium used to get fantastic crowds when Super Rugby was a more attractive competition for fans.

I can post an article about how some NRL teams have seen increased crowds moving away from boutique grounds to centralised stadiums. If you disagreed with that then wouldn't you be doing the same thing you accused me of?

You are absolutely allowed to disagree. It was not clear that you were disagreeign with that particular statement, or why, until now. Thanks for clarifying.

Please note I did day what you said I said, but you have interpreted that as me saying it is the ONLY reason, which I did NOT say. 

I agree with you that it is __A__ factor, but NOT the ONLY factor. I agree 100% that there are a range of factors. I never said there wasn't.